Zos,
I agree with the fact that LR works much better if you feed it more
dough, err.. RAM. ;-)
But my point is that it very much usable on a 32-bit Win-7, especially
if you are not working with files on
Even though the "mainstream support" for Win-7 has ended a week ago,
its extended support period is for 5 more years (and you could buy a
brand new laptop with Win-7 just weeks ago).
Besides, you are forgetting, that there is 32-bit Win-8.1.
Personally, I have a Win-7/32 system on a i7 processor, and I am using
LR-5 on it. It will probably be squeaking if I needed to work with the
files from 645z's 51MP sensor, but it has been working fine with the
files produced with K-7 and even K-5ii-s, and I am not mentioning some
smaller sensor cameras.
I guess, for now, I should be fine with LR-5.
And, hopefully, but the time I really need LR-6, I'll have a new laptop.
The problem with LR-5 that Adobe will not provide updates for the new
cameras (RAW format files).
So, a person who has a perfectly fine functioning less than 1-year old
computer with a 32-bit Windows 8.1 on it, and who buys an "enthusiast
camera" that is capable of shooting [proprietory] RAW, will have a hard
choice: LR-5 wouldn't support those (and probably won't be available
once LR-6 is out), and LR-6 wouldn't run on his/her recent computer.
BTW, an interesting thing that I don't quite understand: I just cheked
and there is a bunch of computers still being sold with Win-7 today
(albeit 64-bit where I can see). And that is not an old stock, but on
the manufacturer's websites. Moreover, there is an announcement of new
models coming out in 2015 by Fujitsu, and it mentions Win-7/64 as an
option:
http://tablet-news.com/2015/01/21/fujitsu-announces-the-stylistic-q775-lifebook-t935-and-t725-tablets-hybrid-devices-with-windows-and-intel-cpus/
As far as I remember, when WinXP mainstream support ended, no more
WinXP was available on the new computers.
Igor
Zos Xavius Fri, 23 Jan 2015 08:53:18 -0800 wrote:
Lightroom really benefits from having over 2gb available to it in RAM.
If you are on a 32-bit OS you are restricted to less than 4gb. Windows
7 eats up 1-2gb on a good day, so you do the math. Its also really
slow on older processors. I don't know about you, but when I have to
export a few hundred pictures at once, its nice to not have to wait 2
hours for that to happen. Waiting on a raw file to render at 1:1 in
lightroom can be pretty slow on older computers too. My aging core i5
with 8gb of RAM seems inadequate these days to be honest. Especially
when pushing huge panoramas through photoshop. Most recent windows 7
installs are 64-bit anyways. This is a non issue except those with
really ancient hardware. BTW, the performance increase between say a
core duo and an i7 is really significant, and its not just the
processor. RAM has increased in speed at a fairly decent clip too. You
can't really expect software designers to support depreciated windows
versions forever. General support for Windows 7 has now ended.
Microsoft doesn't even support it anymore other than security updates
and those will eventually end too. If someone insists on using 32-bit
windows, well LR5 is still plenty powerful enough for the few edge
cases that want to use it with their P&S camera or whatever. I still
use Photoshop CS5 for example. I'm tempted by CC I must admit for the
$10 a month, but CS5 still does everything I really need it to do. The
only thing I want from CC is the expanded panorama tools.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Igor PDML-StR <[email protected]> wrote:
Darren, thanks for the heads-up. That's an unpleasant news.
Larry, you are right from the point of view of the technology.
But it is not the right decision from the users' point of view (ot at
least
some of the users). Adobe is essentially cutting off from the new
versions
of LR those users who have CURRENT and SUPPORTED versions of the major
OS,
Windows 7 and Windows 8.*.
And I disagree with your statement: "to really make use of it, you
really
need pretty serious hardware anyways."
You don't! That's a myth promoted by the hardware manufacturers and
supported by software manufacturers. (And in some [many?] cases,
software
manufacturers are doing a sloppy job by not righting efficient code. I
know
that from "insiders".) You are looking from an elitist point of view: a
person who shoots lots of photos with large file size, etc.
Some people are happily using LR for working on photographs shot with
advanced P&S's. Some people even use it with photos shot in JPEG (not
that I
recommend that, but there could be legitimate cases for that).
Those can perfectly work on a mid-range computer (e.g. laptop) running
Windows that came with it [which is often a 32-bit system].
And while RAM is in my view is the biggest limitation of a 32-bit OS,
LR is well usable with the 3GB of RAM accessible under 32-bit Windows.
One can also make an argument about some people who still need to use
32-bit
system because of some other software that has problems running on
64-bit
Windows. I don't know if that's true anymore or not, - but I might agree
that this argument carries less weight, as that, in most cases is the
fault
of that other software... But again, there could be some
legitimate cases with some vintage software (maybe not as legitimate
with
the vintage hardware).
Does this decision from Adobe surprise me? Not really! It is not the
first
time they "pulled the switch" and turned their back on some of their
users.
Oh, well, I am hooked on LR, but I am not getting married to Adobe.
There are software manufacturers that I like, and there are those that I
dislike for some particular aspects. Adobe is on the latter list. (And I
checked it more than twice!)
Cheers,
Igor
Larry Colen Thu, 22 Jan 2015 15:55:53 -0800 wrote:
Darren Addy wrote:
For those who haven't seen it yet, it looks like if you aren't already
running a 64-bit OS you are going to need to upgrade to be able to run
Lightroom 6:
http://petapixel.com/2015/01/22/adobe-lightroom-6-will-compatible-64-bit-operating-systems/
This is a wise choice on their part. LR5 is great software, but to
really make use of it, you really need pretty serious hardware anyways.
By going to the bigger OS, they can take advantage of more of the
hardware, using 64 bit libraries and such.
